In the last few years there has been a significant increase in the number of terrorist attacks carried out using cars or trucks in order to hit crowds gathered in streets and squares, thus causing actual massacres. This has led to the need to have safety and protection barriers designed to mitigate these attacks in given risk areas.
A currently frequently adopted solution involves the use of fixed barriers, which are permanent and cannot be moved. These barriers usually comprise elements or items that are firmly fixed to the ground. Some anti-vehicle barriers, for example, consist of vertical tubular columns, so-called bollards, made of cement or metal, which have their lower base firmly fixed to the ground.
The permanent protection barriers described above suffer from the drawback of being very complex and expensive to be manufactured, as they require the formation of excavations and foundations especially made to fit the bases into the ground, the removal of the soil resulting from the digging and fastening means to fix the bases of the columns to the ground, for example through concrete or anchors.
The permanent barriers described above are further affected from the technical problem of not being a suitable solution when the protection needed is merely temporary, namely when, at the end of an event, the protected area must be quickly freed from the barrier, so as to allow for the free circulation of vehicles in the area.
To this aim, modular anti-vehicle barrier of the removable type have been designed, which, indeed, can be easily installed and removed before and, respectively, at the end of the event.
Some modular anti-vehicle barriers that are frequently used comprise concrete “Jersey” barriers, which are generally arranged so as to rest on the bearing surface of the ground in positions next to one another, so as to delimit the area to be protected. However, the effectiveness of modular anti-vehicle barriers with “Jersey” modules in mitigating terrorist attacks has some limits. As a matter of fact, “Jersey” modules were conceived for road applications aimed at channelling vehicle flows.
“Jersey” modules, on the one hand, are not suited to neutralize, namely stop, in an effective manner the vehicle used for the attack and, on the other hand, are subjected to being moved, especially in case the impact takes place in a front manner at an end thereof. This displacement can generate an opening, which allows the vehicle to dangerously reach the inside of the protected area.
Furthermore, the operations to be carried out for the transportation and the installation of concrete “Jersey” modules are particularly complicated and expensive, due to the weight and the dimensions thereof.
Another type of modular anti-vehicle barrier of the removable type is described in US patent application US 2017 020 457 5.
This anti-vehicle barrier is provided with a plurality of foldable metal anti-vehicle devices, each basically provided with a first and a second rectangular frame, which are mutually hinged so as to be folded relative to one another between a rest position and an operating protection position. In the rest position, the first and the second frame are close to one another so as to reduce the dimensions and make the transportation easier. In the operating protection position, the first frame rests horizontally on the ground and the second frame is open in an approximately vertical position. This modular anti-vehicle barrier effectively counters the penetration of the vehicle only in one specific impact direction, in which the wheels of the vehicle try to overcome the first frame. The vehicle stopping action of the barrier requires the anti-vehicle device to wedge itself between the front wheels of the vehicle and the ground. During this action, the anti-vehicle device is dragged by the impacting vehicle for some metres on the ground, until its stops.
The barrier described above is affected by the limit of allowing the vehicle to penetrate, even though partially, the area to be protected, with all the consequent risks for the people standing close to the barrier. Another limit of the barrier described above lies in the fact the impact of the vehicle damages the anti-vehicle device.
However, there is the need to manufacture a barrier that is capable, on the one hand, of stopping the vehicle regardless of its direction and, on the other hand, of neutralizing the action of the vehicle in a small space, so as to reduce the risk of the vehicle continuing its ride in the protected area.
To this purpose, the Applicant carried out a study aimed at offering an anti-vehicle barrier which is economic, practical and capable of overcoming the drawbacks mentioned above.